geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Sangjin Lee" <sjl...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [AsyncHttpClient] handling user-supplied request body (and content type)
Date Wed, 13 Feb 2008 19:45:36 GMT
No worries.  I'll work on creating a patch for asyncweb, and let you know.
Thanks,
Sangjin


On Feb 13, 2008 10:42 AM, Rick McGuire <rickmcg@gmail.com> wrote:

> Sangjin Lee wrote:
> > Thanks much for taking care of this Rick!  Shall we move the bug to
> > ASYNCWEB like the last time?
> Yes, we probably should. I got sidetracked on some other stuff today,
> and didn't get a chance to do it?  Do you have time to generate a patch
> for the asyncweb tree?
>
> Rick
>
> >
> > Regards,
> > Sangjin
> >
> > On Feb 12, 2008 3:43 PM, Sangjin Lee <sjlee0@gmail.com
> > <mailto:sjlee0@gmail.com>> wrote:
> >
> >     I just submitted a patch that includes Rick's fixes as well as the
> >     fix that addresses the content issue.  Please review and apply the
> >     patch if you're OK with it...  Thanks!
> >
> >     Sangjin
> >
> >
> >
> >     On Feb 12, 2008 1:01 PM, Rick McGuire <rickmcg@gmail.com
> >     <mailto:rickmcg@gmail.com>> wrote:
> >
> >         Sangjin Lee wrote:
> >         > I'm getting the patch ready for this...  Would a separate bug
> be
> >         > needed or shall we use the existing bug but modify it?  A
> >         single patch
> >         > will address both issues...
> >         I think we can use the already existing one.  That patch has
> >         not been
> >         committed to the codebase yet.
> >
> >         Rick
> >         >
> >         > Thanks,
> >         > Sangjin
> >         >
> >         > On Feb 12, 2008 11:12 AM, Rick McGuire <rickmcg@gmail.com
> >         <mailto:rickmcg@gmail.com>
> >         > <mailto:rickmcg@gmail.com <mailto:rickmcg@gmail.com>>>
wrote:
> >         >
> >         >     Sangjin Lee wrote:
> >         >     > While looking at an issue related with a form post
> >         >     (GERONIMO-3839), I
> >         >     > found an even more glaring issue.  Namely, any
> >         caller-supplied
> >         >     request
> >         >     > body is ignored by HttpRequestEncoder.  For example,
> >         you may want to
> >         >     > do a simple file upload using an octet stream.  One
> >         can set the
> >         >     > content using HttpMessage.addContent(byte[]).
> >         >     I sort of wondered about that hard-coded content type
> >         when I was
> >         >     working
> >         >     on the header changes.  I'm glad it bothered somebody
> >         else enough to
> >         >     investigate.
> >         >
> >         >     Rick
> >         >
> >         >     >
> >         >     > However, HttpRequestEncoder makes a specific
> >         assumption that all
> >         >     post
> >         >     > requests are form posts.  Therefore, it ignores any
> >         message
> >         >     body, and
> >         >     > simply encodes the form into the body.  We need to be
> >         able to handle
> >         >     > this properly.  I'll file a bug shortly...
> >         >     >
> >         >     > Thanks,
> >         >     > Sangjin
> >         >     >
> >         >
> >         >
> >
> >
> >
>
>

Mime
View raw message